Prisoner's dilemma

In the prisoner?s dilemma feeble, the situation is that Albert, a off-key person, and I be accused of committing a crime. Whether or non we committed the crime is non relevant as we are both(prenominal) being held in separate room for interrogation. The intent of the game is non to necessarily prove my innocence, just now rather to bounds the number of jail we, combined, spend in jail. on that institutionalise are different strategies I can choose for Albert to follow. These embarrass: the golden rule, the brazen rule, the brazen rule 3, the iron rule, and unknown. This, I thought, would make the game quite easy. When the golden rule was use (which states, do onto others as you would want done to you) I knew the Albert would non confess; I, too, chose non to confess. The result was that we were both given 2 days. I went back and played again to see if my scheme was the best one. The second time I chose to confess. I be that I got off with no time in jail, howe ver Albert was given 5 old age. A combined 4 years is better than the 5 years the Albert got, so therefore I won the game. When the brazen rule was applied, I was confused at the result at first. The brazen rule states, repay munificence with philanthropy. I chose to confess and we both got 4 years. I and so went back and tried other scenarios. I tried to not confess and I got 5 years, while Albert was let free. I then chose to not confess again and we both did not confessed and got 2 years each. I then realized that Albert repaid my good-will and the second time caught on to what I was doing and followed suit. The brazen... If you want to string along a bead on a full essay, target it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper